BRTD, that district with the Rockaway peninsula, what looks like could be South Jamaica and SW Nassau is GROSS

And if anyone could respond to my previous post, Id greatly appreciate it. I have no clue what the current status is. I'm just trying to piece it together for forum posts and a few NYTimes articles. Thanks.

I'm really have a tough time following all the twists and turns of this byzantine redistricting proces. Can someone inform me if this very basic summary is right-

Dems and Reps cannot agree on map

Cuomo is pissed and an agreement is hammered out by both parties to have an independent Judge draw up a map

Craven career politicians on both sides get scared and decide to cooperate to perpetuate their power

Cuomo throws up his hands and punts 10 years for change in state Constit. - Lost on where things stand now.

I know their will be several different Republican primaries and I'm looking to see even what districts I will be in.

Any links to updates would be appreciated.

The Assembly passed the state Senate and Assembly redistricting plans tonight 93-43. The State Senate just passed it 36-0 with most Democrats leaving the chamber because debate was cut off after 2.5 hours. The Senate then passed the constitutional amendment creating an independent redistricting commission in 2020. Because constitutional amendments require passage by two successive legislatures, there's some sort of hammer provision that takes away the ability of the legislators to appoint members to the commission if it's not passed again next year. The legislature has a sort of veto power over the commission maps, though they wouldn't have free reign to draw whatever they want. The Senate and Assembly majority wanted to pass this tonight because there's a court hearing on the progress of the state maps tomorrow.

This is all part of a grand compromise package that includes casino gambling, pension reform and redistricting reform, among other things, which is why Cuomo is caving.

9 is majority minority and almost 70% Obama. Some of those swing districts are in the vicinity of 55-56% Obama but since Republicans hold such seats on Long Island now I'm calling them swing. 2 voted for Obama 50-48 but almost certainly would elect a Republican.

10 doesn't go too far into Jamaica. It has a lot of land area, but that's because of the airport.

NYCOK some interesting districts but the only ones worth noting from a partisan perspective are 20 (the pink south Brooklyn one), 23 (southern Staten Island) and 24 (the purple one near 21, NY Jew's dream seat). 21 is basically a swing seat, 51.1% McCain, but Democrats hold such districts in that area now. 23 would obviously go Republican, (61.3% McCain FTR), 24 is 62.3% McCain but who knows how bloc voting in that area goes, so we'll call it a swing seat. The rest are obviously all safe Dem (11-36), so that's 23 Dem seats, 2 swing ones and 1 Republican.

Westchester areaYou got a south Westchester seat, 37 (dark blue) and a northern seat (teal), both are >60% Obama, oddly the outer one is more Dem (62.2-61.7%). Both go Dem. 39 is Rockland County's seat, it has almost enough population for a district, lol. Probably held by a Republican despite being won by Obama. Further north you have two likely Republican seats, though the green one was about 52% Obama (the brown one is about 50%) McCain, so 3-2 from this region.

Further upstateWell count this up till 55 (the one right west of Syracuse). The safe or near safe Dem seats are 41 (Kingston-Poughkeepsie, about 58% Obama), 45 (Albany), 51 ("Only" about 55% Obama, but since it contains Ithaca the GOP's going to need a hell of a candidate running up the vote in the non-Ithaca areas) and 53 (Syracuse). 44 would be winnable for the Dems, (53.2% Obama, running up to Canada on the Vermont border), also possibilities are 46 (Schenectady), 50 (Binghamton), 54 (Suburban Syracuse-Oswego) which were about 52-53% Obama. 43 (that pink rural area), 47 (around Albany) and 48 (the other big northern seat) all voted for Obama with about 51%, but thus would be kind of tricky to win in most years. 49 (Utica-Rome) was 52.8% McCain and 55 (Auburn) voted for Obama by just a couple hundred votes, probably truly unwinnable. So 4 Dem seats, 5 likely Republican seats, and 3 swing ones, that would no doubt be Republican held now.

West52 (ugly color on the southern border), 58 (purple) and 59 (red) are obviously all very safe Republican seats. That guy in Rochester is doomed, district 57 contains the city and is 73% Obama. 62 is the main Buffalo seat, that's 75% Obama. 60 (the yellow seat along the coast) and 61 (Niagara Falls to Amherst) are swing districts, about 52.5% Obama and 54.8% Obama respectively, 56 (suburban Rochester) is 51% Obama, so probably would be won by a Republican most of the time. 2 Dem seats, 2 swing, and 4 Republican.

I'm really have a tough time following all the twists and turns of this byzantine redistricting proces. Can someone inform me if this very basic summary is right-

Dems and Reps cannot agree on map

Cuomo is pissed and an agreement is hammered out by both parties to have an independent Judge draw up a map

Craven career politicians on both sides get scared and decide to cooperate to perpetuate their power

Cuomo throws up his hands and punts 10 years for change in state Constit. - Lost on where things stand now.

I know their will be several different Republican primaries and I'm looking to see even what districts I will be in.

Any links to updates would be appreciated.

The Assembly passed the state Senate and Assembly redistricting plans tonight 93-43. The State Senate just passed it 36-0 with most Democrats leaving the chamber because debate was cut off after 2.5 hours. The Senate then passed the constitutional amendment creating an independent redistricting commission in 2020. Because constitutional amendments require passage by two successive legislatures, there's some sort of hammer provision that takes away the ability of the legislators to appoint members to the commission if it's not passed again next year. The legislature has a sort of veto power over the commission maps, though they wouldn't have free reign to draw whatever they want. The Senate and Assembly majority wanted to pass this tonight because there's a court hearing on the progress of the state maps tomorrow.

This is all part of a grand compromise package that includes casino gambling, pension reform and redistricting reform, among other things, which is why Cuomo is caving.

The US House maps are NOT included in this package.

Thanks a million, Cinyc. It seems that following all of the twists in Albany is nearly a full time job. Do you have a link to the maps that were passed and what in the world is going on with the House now? I'm a registered Republican and will probably have like 3 different primaries on separate dates. I'm doing my best to try and keep up.

Thanks a million, Cinyc. It seems that following all of the twists in Albany is nearly a full time job. Do you have a link to the maps that were passed and what in the world is going on with the House now? I'm a registered Republican and will probably have like 3 different primaries on separate dates. I'm doing my best to try and keep up.

We're almost certainly going to have three primaries this year - the Presidential primary in April, the federal offices primary in June and the state offices primary in September, assuming there are candidates in your district for the latter two. There probably will be a Republican primary for US Senator given the number of declared candidates, so it's really a question of whether there are multiple State Senate and Assembly candidates in your districts (or a local race, if there is one). Some good government groups want to hold the state primaries in June, too - but the petitioning period would begin in a matter of weeks if they did that, so it's probably not going to happen.

Thanks a million, Cinyc. It seems that following all of the twists in Albany is nearly a full time job. Do you have a link to the maps that were passed and what in the world is going on with the House now? I'm a registered Republican and will probably have like 3 different primaries on separate dates. I'm doing my best to try and keep up.

We're almost certainly going to have three primaries this year - the Presidential primary in April, the federal offices primary in June and the state offices primary in September, assuming there are candidates in your district for the latter two. There probably will be a Republican primary for US Senator given the number of declared candidates, so it's really a question of whether there are multiple State Senate and Assembly candidates in your districts (or a local race, if there is one). Some good government groups want to hold the state primaries in June, too - but the petitioning period would begin in a matter of weeks if they did that, so it's probably not going to happen.

Well, I am in Skelos' district so nothing there. From your link it looks like I lost my Assemblyman. It was Curran, however, it appears I will now be in the first/last block of an open seat, DOJ approved 22. There certainly will be a primary but demographically it looks like he/she will be a R loser.

Looking at the State Senate map, it pretty much preserves the previous gerrymander of Long Island, though I'm sure there are changes here and there. The seats that the Republicans gained back in 2010 were 3 and 7 that were lost in 2008 - I'd really need to examine these boundaries closely to see what was done. 5 and 6 have also been somewhat close in the 2006/2008 cycle, fwiw, the others were never close.

NYC becomes even more gerrymandered than before, in Brooklyn, particularly, - Avella (11) and Stavisky (16) are pulled into the same district on the edges, but this is Avella's territory. Huntley (10), Gianaris (12), Peralta (13), Smith (14) retain pretty much the same shape, though note the finger they created in Addabo's district (15). (16) is open (as noted above) and a monstrosity as before - I need to see whether anything's different here - doesn't look like it on its face. (17) is the NY Jew seat, formed from Kruger and part of Parker. Dilan, formerly (17), now becomes (18), basically the same. Sampson (19) nor Adams (20) receives no real change worth mentioning, except Adams gets Sunset Park for some reason now, in exchange for his parts of the new NY Jew seat. It's also an ugly gerrymander.

Parker (21) is pushed northwards, gaining more black liberal areas. Marty Golden (GOP) in (22) took the parts of Kruger's seat that were marginal/Republican, but not Jewish - it is a gerrymander of beauty. Savino (23) and Lanza (GOP) (24) are also pretty much the same as before. Montgomery, formerly (18), now becomes (25), basically the same. I'm still in Squadron's district now renumbered as (26) from (25), but no real material changes. Duane is renumbered (27) after being (29), and loses a lot of the upper West Side north of 72nd Street (don't know why) and there's also some weird gerrymander into MSG/Penn Station/Port Authority Bus Terminal for Espillat that I can't explain. Liz Kreuger's UES/Murray Hill SD becomes (28) from (26) and becomes a bit less compact. Serrano (29) from (28) trades some of Spanish Harlem for a chunk of the Upper West Side above 72nd, which I can't particularly figure out either. Perkins (30) still has his Harlem seat.

Getting to Espillat (31), his seat is still Washington Heights and chunks other places. Diaz in (32) becomes much uglier, probably to protect him even better, I would suspect. I don't believe Rivera (33) changes in any substantial way. Klein (34) loses most of his Westchester parts, but retains basically the same structure otherwise, gaining more of the parts of the upper income/white Bronx (to the extent such things exist of course). Hassell-Thompson gets nicer boundaries (36), but is basically the same black district.

I'll do upstate tomorrow (35 and 37-63), but as we can see, the GOP is looking to create the new NY Jew seat and shore up Golden in Brooklyn (like he really needs much - the problem is when he retires) to get 3 seats out of the city instead of 2. I'll have to look over Queens to see if any games are being played there - nothing shows on its face, so the GOP may have well left that alone, realizing that it is probably gone. I also need to look over Long Island - there are probably some changes at the margins that I'm missing.

State Assembly is not really worth messing with too much - pretty sure it preserves the same Dem gerrymander and massive margins.

No surprise, but the appellate court seems disinclined to mess much with the Congressional map Judge Mann drew, if at all. One judge noted the ripple effect, and if you mess in one place, that has consequences elsewhere, and so forth, and time is short anyway. Nobody really lodged any real objections anyway, other than the Senate Pubs who whimpered that no cognizance was taken as to where incumbents lived. That one is going absolutely nowhere.

Sam, on the state senate, how effectively did the Pubs move the ball towards their goal of making their majority more secure than it is now? What is the partisan PVI number which is at the tipping point between control and losing control? Are the tipping point seats around Pub PVI +3%, or greater or less?

Looking at the State Senate map, it pretty much preserves the previous gerrymander of Long Island, though I'm sure there are changes here and there. The seats that the Republicans gained back in 2010 were 3 and 7 that were lost in 2008 - I'd really need to examine these boundaries closely to see what was done. 5 and 6 have also been somewhat close in the 2006/2008 cycle, fwiw, the others were never close.

NYC becomes even more gerrymandered than before, in Brooklyn, particularly, - Avella (11) and Stavisky (16) are pulled into the same district on the edges, but this is Avella's territory. Huntley (10), Gianaris (12), Peralta (13), Smith (14) retain pretty much the same shape, though note the finger they created in Addabo's district (15). (16) is open (as noted above) and a monstrosity as before - I need to see whether anything's different here - doesn't look like it on its face. (17) is the NY Jew seat, formed from Kruger and part of Parker. Dilan, formerly (17), now becomes (18), basically the same. Sampson (19) nor Adams (20) receives no real change worth mentioning, except Adams gets Sunset Park for some reason now, in exchange for his parts of the new NY Jew seat. It's also an ugly gerrymander.

Parker (21) is pushed northwards, gaining more black liberal areas. Marty Golden (GOP) in (22) took the parts of Kruger's seat that were marginal/Republican, but not Jewish - it is a gerrymander of beauty. Savino (23) and Lanza (GOP) (24) are also pretty much the same as before. Montgomery, formerly (18), now becomes (25), basically the same. I'm still in Squadron's district now renumbered as (26) from (25), but no real material changes. Duane is renumbered (27) after being (29), and loses a lot of the upper West Side north of 72nd Street (don't know why) and there's also some weird gerrymander into MSG/Penn Station/Port Authority Bus Terminal for Espillat that I can't explain. Liz Kreuger's UES/Murray Hill SD becomes (28) from (26) and becomes a bit less compact. Serrano (29) from (28) trades some of Spanish Harlem for a chunk of the Upper West Side above 72nd, which I can't particularly figure out either. Perkins (30) still has his Harlem seat.

Getting to Espillat (31), his seat is still Washington Heights and chunks other places. Diaz in (32) becomes much uglier, probably to protect him even better, I would suspect. I don't believe Rivera (33) changes in any substantial way. Klein (34) loses most of his Westchester parts, but retains basically the same structure otherwise, gaining more of the parts of the upper income/white Bronx (to the extent such things exist of course). Hassell-Thompson gets nicer boundaries (36), but is basically the same black district.

I'll do upstate tomorrow (35 and 37-63), but as we can see, the GOP is looking to create the new NY Jew seat and shore up Golden in Brooklyn (like he really needs much - the problem is when he retires) to get 3 seats out of the city instead of 2. I'll have to look over Queens to see if any games are being played there - nothing shows on its face, so the GOP may have well left that alone, realizing that it is probably gone. I also need to look over Long Island - there are probably some changes at the margins that I'm missing.

State Assembly is not really worth messing with too much - pretty sure it preserves the same Dem gerrymander and massive margins.

Sam, on the state senate, how effectively did the Pubs move the ball towards their goal of making their majority more secure than it is now? What is the partisan PVI number which is at the tipping point between control and losing control? Are the tipping point seats around Pub PVI +3%, or greater or less?

The Senate wouldn't have proposed this map if they didn't think it secured things stronger (exactly how much that is in reality, who knows)

In Long Island, the tipping point seats will have Dem PVIs, probably D+3 to D+5, but I don't know exactly. Truthfully, I suspect most (if not all) of the seats would be marginal in a national environment, after all Long Island as a whole is about D+1, D+2. I need to really break down the changes in the SDs to see what happened to SDs 3, 5, 6 and 7, as these were the problem/close seats in 2006/2008. The GOP controls it all - so all they can go is down, anyways.

In NYC, Lanza is a GOP PVI seat, the NY Jew seat is certainly one, though historically Dem down the ballot (but that is probably changing too). Golden's seat certainly got more Republican areas, so it may have gotten back to a GOP PVI (I know it wasn't before), but I don't know for sure. At any rate, Golden will never be beaten so long as he's on the ballot, so who cares.

As you are aware, the GOP lost their last historical seat in Queens in the last election, but I don't know whether any of the games that I'm seeing would have any effect in the Queens seats that are most favorable to the GOP. I suspect not, as I think that ship has sailed. The Republicans aren't packed like they are in Brooklyn.

All in all, I really can only see the GOP, at best, getting one seat from this map in NYC and Long Island. (presently 24-11 (techically 23-11-1), with 2 "independent" Dems) Upstate is 21-6, so I have to see what seats have actually been made more problematic. Upstate will be later, and I'll give a little more of a close look.

The Senate wouldn't have proposed this map if they didn't think it secured things stronger (exactly how much that is in reality, who knows)

In Long Island, the tipping point seats will have Dem PVIs, probably D+3 to D+5, but I don't know exactly. Truthfully, I suspect most (if not all) of the seats would be marginal in a national environment, after all Long Island as a whole is about D+1, D+2. I need to really break down the changes in the SDs to see what happened to SDs 3, 5, 6 and 7, as these were the problem/close seats in 2006/2008. The GOP controls it all - so all they can go is down, anyways.

In NYC, Lanza is a GOP PVI seat, the NY Jew seat is certainly one, though historically Dem down the ballot (but that is probably changing too). Golden's seat certainly got more Republican areas, so it may have gotten back to a GOP PVI (I know it wasn't before), but I don't know for sure. At any rate, Golden will never be beaten so long as he's on the ballot, so who cares.

As you are aware, the GOP lost their last historical seat in Queens in the last election, but I don't know whether any of the games that I'm seeing would have any effect in the Queens seats that are most favorable to the GOP. I suspect not, as I think that ship has sailed. The Republicans aren't packed like they are in Brooklyn.

All in all, I really can only see the GOP, at best, getting one seat from this map in NYC and Long Island. (presently 24-11 (techically 23-11-1), with 2 "independent" Dems) Upstate is 21-6, so I have to see what seats have actually been made more problematic. Upstate will be later, and I'll give a little more of a close look.

SD-37 was gerrymandered to give Republicans their best shot at winning a Westchester seat. With the Republican incumbents in SD-34 and 35 long gone, the more Republican-leaning areas of those districts, Eastchester and Eastern Yonkers, were added to SD-37, while Democratic-leaning Scarsdale and parts of White Plains and New Rochelle were put into SD-35. SD-37 also added Republican-leaning Bedford and lost Ossining and New Castle in the northern part of the county. The SD-37 incumbent Democrat is retiring after almost losing under the more Dem-favorable old lines last cycle, so the Senate must think the district will be competitive if not lean Republican.

The Senate wouldn't have proposed this map if they didn't think it secured things stronger (exactly how much that is in reality, who knows)

In Long Island, the tipping point seats will have Dem PVIs, probably D+3 to D+5, but I don't know exactly. Truthfully, I suspect most (if not all) of the seats would be marginal in a national environment, after all Long Island as a whole is about D+1, D+2. I need to really break down the changes in the SDs to see what happened to SDs 3, 5, 6 and 7, as these were the problem/close seats in 2006/2008. The GOP controls it all - so all they can go is down, anyways.

In NYC, Lanza is a GOP PVI seat, the NY Jew seat is certainly one, though historically Dem down the ballot (but that is probably changing too). Golden's seat certainly got more Republican areas, so it may have gotten back to a GOP PVI (I know it wasn't before), but I don't know for sure. At any rate, Golden will never be beaten so long as he's on the ballot, so who cares.

As you are aware, the GOP lost their last historical seat in Queens in the last election, but I don't know whether any of the games that I'm seeing would have any effect in the Queens seats that are most favorable to the GOP. I suspect not, as I think that ship has sailed. The Republicans aren't packed like they are in Brooklyn.

All in all, I really can only see the GOP, at best, getting one seat from this map in NYC and Long Island. (presently 24-11 (techically 23-11-1), with 2 "independent" Dems) Upstate is 21-6, so I have to see what seats have actually been made more problematic. Upstate will be later, and I'll give a little more of a close look.

SD-37 was gerrymandered to give Republicans their best shot at winning a Westchester seat. With the Republican incumbents in SD-34 and 35 long gone, the more Republican-leaning areas of those districts, Eastchester and Eastern Yonkers, were added to SD-37, while Democratic-leaning Scarsdale and parts of White Plains and New Rochelle were put into SD-35. SD-37 also added Republican-leaning Bedford and lost Ossining and New Castle in the northern part of the county. The SD-37 incumbent Democrat is retiring after almost losing under the more Dem-favorable old lines last cycle, so the Senate must think the district will be competitive if not lean Republican.

Oppenheimer almost lost in 2010 because independents were more Republican than they will ever be for another 40 years and Democratic turnout fell through the floor. The only way Republicans will pick up that seat in 2012 is if the Obama percentage is moved down to the low 50's.

Upstate, there are only three Democratic held districts and they will probably need to be packed further to help out Republican incumbents in surrounding areas. I wonder what they did to help Greg Ball just north of Westchester, who only won 51%-49% in the best Republican year in many generations.

Oppenheimer almost lost in 2010 because independents were more Republican than they will ever be for another 40 years and Democratic turnout fell through the floor. The only way Republicans will pick up that seat in 2012 is if the Obama percentage is moved down to the low 50's.

Upstate, there are only three Democratic held districts and they will probably need to be packed further to help out Republican incumbents in surrounding areas. I wonder what they did to help Greg Ball just north of Westchester, who only won 51%-49% in the best Republican year in many generations.

Given that Westchester state senate districts have been held by Republicans in the past decade, I seriously doubt that independents were more Republican in 2010 than they will ever be for 40 years. They were even more Republican in prior years when Republicans won and can be more Republican in the future.

Coattails are overrated. Republicans hold plenty of Long Island State Senate seats where Obama was in the mid-50s. A Republican could win SD-37 under similar circumstances.

Ball was given the other Republican-friendly town in old SD-35, Mount Pleasant. It is one of the most Republican-leaning towns in the county. But he lost about half of Putnam County, so that may just offset what was lost instead of shore him up. Without the need to shore up a Republican incumbent, SD-35 is now a Democratic vote sink in the southern and central parts of Westchester.

Oppenheimer almost lost in 2010 because independents were more Republican than they will ever be for another 40 years and Democratic turnout fell through the floor. The only way Republicans will pick up that seat in 2012 is if the Obama percentage is moved down to the low 50's.

Upstate, there are only three Democratic held districts and they will probably need to be packed further to help out Republican incumbents in surrounding areas. I wonder what they did to help Greg Ball just north of Westchester, who only won 51%-49% in the best Republican year in many generations.

Given that Westchester state senate districts have been held by Republicans in the past decade, I seriously doubt that independents were more Republican in 2010 than they will ever be for 40 years. They were even more Republican in prior years when Republicans won and can be more Republican in the future.

Coattails are overrated. Republicans hold plenty of Long Island State Senate seats where Obama was in the mid-50s. A Republican could win SD-37 under similar circumstances.

Ball was given the other Republican-friendly town in old SD-35, Mount Pleasant. It is one of the most Republican-leaning towns in the county. But he lost about half of Putnam County, so that may just offset what was lost instead of shore him up. Without the need to shore up a Republican incumbent, SD-35 is now a Democratic vote sink in the southern and central parts of Westchester.

Republicans held those Long-Island seats as LONG TIME INCUMBENTS. The Westchester districts were held by Republicans in the past, just like Democrats held many districts in Alabama and Tennessee in the past.

The only way Republicans win the new SD-37 in 2012 is if they somehow get the Obama percentage down to 53% or below. There is no popular long time incumbent running there like on Long Island.

I also would like to see what happened to SD-07, where Craig Johnson barely lost in 2010. He would be very stupid not to run again unless the district is somehow made much more Republican.

Republicans held those Long-Island seats as LONG TIME INCUMBENTS. The Westchester districts were held by Republicans in the past, just like Democrats held many districts in Alabama and Tennessee in the past.

Westchester County is not Alabama or Tennessee. The county executive is a Republican and Republicans picked up county board seats last cycle. Part of the county has a Republican congresswoman. If anything, the county is trending Republican after trending Democratic during the Bush years.

Quote

The only way Republicans win the new SD-37 in 2012 is if they somehow get the Obama percentage down to 53% or below. There is no popular long time incumbent running there like on Long Island.

It will be a totally open seat with no incumbent at all that voted 50-50 in the 2010 legislative elections. And coattails are overrated. Republicans won back the state Senate last cycle despite having a dreadful gubernatorial candidate at the top of the ticket.

Quote

I also would like to see what happened to SD-07, where Craig Johnson barely lost in 2010. He would be very stupid not to run again unless the district is somehow made much more Republican.

Not a ton. It's hard to tell exactly what happened because Long Island doesn't have many towns and the maps don't show villages, but it looks like SD-07 took in a little bit more of Hicksville in exchange for losing part of Elmont. That's about it. I'd be surprised if its partisan makeup moved more than a point.

Republicans held those Long-Island seats as LONG TIME INCUMBENTS. The Westchester districts were held by Republicans in the past, just like Democrats held many districts in Alabama and Tennessee in the past.

Westchester County is not Alabama or Tennessee. The county executive is a Republican and Republicans picked up county board seats last cycle. Part of the county has a Republican congresswoman. If anything, the county is trending Republican after trending Democratic during the Bush years.

Quote

The only way Republicans win the new SD-37 in 2012 is if they somehow get the Obama percentage down to 53% or below. There is no popular long time incumbent running there like on Long Island.

It will be a totally open seat with no incumbent at all that voted 50-50 in the 2010 legislative elections. And coattails are overrated. Republicans won back the state Senate last cycle despite having a dreadful gubernatorial candidate at the top of the ticket.

Quote

I also would like to see what happened to SD-07, where Craig Johnson barely lost in 2010. He would be very stupid not to run again unless the district is somehow made much more Republican.

Not a ton. It's hard to tell exactly what happened because Long Island doesn't have many towns and the maps don't show villages, but it looks like SD-07 took in a little bit more of Hicksville in exchange for losing part of Elmont. That's about it. I'd be surprised if its partisan makeup moved more than a point.

The county executive is Republican elected in the Republican heavy 2009-2010 cycle where Democratic turnout fell through the floor and indepndents were heavily Republican.

Republicans won back the state Senate in 2010 because Cuomo refused to help downballot Democrats and the Republican candidtate was so much of a joke that there was no real campaign to drive turnout on the Democratic side. 50-50 in 2010 is really like 55-45 Dem in a normal cycle. Republicans did about five points better than normal across the board in 2010.

Democrats were asleep in 2009 and 2010. They wont be in 2012 or 2014 thanks to the orange Speaker.

I suspect the Republicans have the advantage in New York. They can say, look if you don't suck up the loss of both seats, we will just let the courts draw the map, wrecking havoc with all of your sordid little NYC district deals, and your favorite boy Hinchey Mr. Silver, is going to be gone anyway, and we want him gone, because he is just so annoying.

So, just draw an octopus connecting inner city Rochester to Syracuse to Ithaca to some more Dem territory up there in the far Northeast, or maybe Rome, put all of Buffalo in one CD (maybe Buffalo could go grab Ithaca, but it is a long way, and get rid of Engel down in Westchester and environs. We really don't have that much to lose anyway. If we lose an extra seat per the court map, but render chaos and animus in your ranks, the schadenfreude will more than make up for it. So go ahead, and just say no, and make our day when you see what the court map does to you. Do you really want to take that risk?

That is the approach I would take. I would give the Dems as it pertains to protecting the incumbent Pubbies, a close to a take it or leave it map.

The flex by the way, is that the Buffalo district was drawn by the Pubbies to protect their incumbent Quinn back in 2001, but he retired, and a Dem holds the seat now, so cede it to him. That sucks up a lot of upstate Dems, and allows the Rochester CD to get out of Buffalo, and into Syracuse and Ithaca and the like.

Decent enough call.

Logged

The real scandal in Washington is not the bribery, corruption, or sex. It is how poorly we are governed.